Electing Our Leaders

I am the first person to admit that I don’t understand much about politics or government. And frankly, neither do you. I can’t grasp the thinking behind a lot of what they do. Currently, we have two (really, only two, the independents never make it) parties that burn up millions, if not billions, of tax payer’s money just to settle on one party candidate over another. I don’t even want to think what the whole Clinton/Obama fiasco cost us.

But that’s not what really galls me. Currently we have the worst line-up of presidential candidates I have ever seen. Frankly, I’m not voting FOR any of them, I’m voting against the ones I find most objectionable. And why? Because this party and that party upchucked these people and left us with no other alternatives. Why the hell do we have to settle for what the parties support? Why can’t we go to the booth and select whomever we want? If I want to vote for the bum that sleeps in the ally behind Burger King, then I should be able to do so. But no, you have x-choices on the ballet and no option to punch none of the above. Frankly, we should have the “none of the above” option on the ballet. If the Dummy-crats get 28% of the vote, and the Republi-fatcats get 32% of the vote and the “none-of-the-above” takes 40% of the vote, then neither of the candidates get elected and we start with a new line up. Franky, we should have a mock-election one year before the real thing where everybody writes in whoever the hell they want and the top contenders get to run. This is a government of the people, by the people, for the people. So when do the people get to choose instead of just the party leaders?

Which supports my position that it is the PEOPLE who should be selecting candidates and not Parties. But think about this: even if, and I say IF, Obama is not a practicing Muslim, he was still raised by Muslim fathers, taught in Muslim schools and supports a Muslim leader. Now, given how uptight Muslims are about women and nudity, I suspect he would install judges who would be hot to make Hugh Hefner throw burkas on the centerfolds. The First Amendment would take serious abuse. I’ve been reading up on Sharia law and Mohammad and frankly I wouldn’t want to live anywhere near a country that operated that way. Mohammad had no problem with beating, or even killing his wife, cutting off his daughters hands (I’m not saying he did that, just that he had no problem with the idea), and killing or taxing (extorting, really) non-Muslims. Today we throw people like that into maximum security prisons and throw away the key!

I still envy the USA for the many good things that we don’t have in Germany.

– We cannot freely speak our minds, for there is a paragraph in our penal code that forbids certain right-extremist opinion. Even though I have nothing to to with those brown idiots, I think that such a paragraph is unworty of a country claims to be democratic and that claims to have freedom of speech.
– You can elect your president more or less directly. We cannot even do that. Our president is elected by the parties, as is our chancellor. The people can’t do anything about it by legal means. In Germany, almost all power lies within the hands of the parties, and their members ignore the German Constitution as they please. Our Constitutional Court – yes, we have something like this – only rarely intervenes.
– The powers in Germany are partly merged, i.e. there is a fusion between the legislative and the executive powers… well, in the EUSSR, things are even worse, for there, we have the return of the Politburo, just under a different name.